Re: merge command - GSoC progress

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Boxuan Zhai <bxzhai2010(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: merge command - GSoC progress
Date: 2010-08-04 14:36:44
Message-ID: 1280932604.1838.91.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 17:23 +0800, Boxuan Zhai wrote:
> Dear Robert,
>
> I am just considering that there may be some logical mistakes for my
> rule rewriting strategy of MERGE actions.
>
> In my current design, if we find that an action type, say UPDATE, is
> replaced by INSTEAD rules, we will remove all the actions of this type
> from the MERGE command, as if they are not be specified by user from
> the beginning. See the test example in my pages for this situation.
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/MergeTestExamples#With_INSTEAD_rules

It seems sensible to use the test files that I wrote for MERGE in 2008,
published to -hackers at that time.

The tests were a complete output from a MERGE test script.

Developing new tests when we already have code makes little sense, plus
its a good way of objectively testing that the spec has been implemented
correctly in these patches.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2010-08-04 14:37:10 Re: string_agg delimiter having no effect with order by
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-04 14:35:55 Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch